Court case 4 S 1/21 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2022)

In April 2019, the data subject received an advertising email to his professional email address in which a training course organised by the controller was advertised. The data subject had neither ordered this advertisement nor otherwise consented to its receipt. He objected to such mailings by email and set the controller a deadline of 30 May 2019. In June 2019, the controller sent the data subject another advertising email for this event. The data subject started a legal action claiming that the controller had unlawfully obtained his email address, as it was neither generally accessible nor communicated by him. In January 2021, the District Court of Heidelberg (AG Heidelberg) partially granted the action. It ordered the controller to cease and desist further advertising emails and to provide the information requested by the data subject on his personal data and otherwise dismissed the action with regard to the requested damages for pain and suffering. It held that a claim for damages for pain and suffering pursuant to Article 82(1) GDPR did not exist, as the data subject had not suffered any noticeable disadvantage and no objectively comprehensible impairment of personal interests of a certain weight as a result of receiving the two advertising emails. The Regional Court of Heidelberg awarded the data subject damages under Article 82 GDPR in the amount of €25. The court held that the data subject suffered damages because he had to deal with the unsolicited advertising emails of the controller, determine their origin, seek information from the controller by means of a letter and delete the unsolicited emails. An external effect of the infringement affecting the data subject in the sense of a risk of damage to his reputation or profession or a discriminatory effect towards third parties was not apparent. In order to compensate for the impairments suffered, the court considered the payment of €25, similar to the usual lump sum for expenses in traffic accidents fo